On November 7, Cui Tiankai, former Chinese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs and Ambassador to the United States, attended the “APEC China Year · Greater Bay Area Academic Roundtable” in Shenzhen, where he shared his views on China-US relations and AI governance.
On China-US relations, Cui Tiankai emphasised that the two countries should strive to establish a relationship of “constructive strategic stability”, characterised by cooperation as the priority, competition within reasonable bounds, manageable differences, and the prospect of peace. China’s development has never been aimed at replacing or challenging the United States. While competition between the two countries is inevitable, it should not become a zero-sum game. Instead, both sides should recognise that cooperation benefits both, while confrontation harms both.
Cui argued that the political, economic and social challenges currently facing the United States have deep-rooted structural causes and cannot simply be attributed to any individual leader. Nor should domestic political developments in the US undermine bilateral relations.
He particularly criticised Washington’s tendency to broaden the concept of national security and to politicise and weaponise scientific, educational and people-to-people exchanges, arguing that such practices ultimately undermine genuine national security interests. He called on the US to remove unnecessary barriers to exchanges and restore normal scientific and people-to-people cooperation. Even modest progress through dialogue, he stressed, would be worthwhile as long as it moves in the right direction.
On AI governance, Cui argued that artificial intelligence could become an important area of China-US cooperation, as both countries have the capability and responsibility to work together to ensure that AI remains under human control and serves the public good. He rejected an approach driven by fear, suspicion and confrontation towards China’s technological progress, arguing that zero-sum thinking is particularly inappropriate in a field as advanced as artificial intelligence.
At the global level, he advocated a people-centred approach and the principle of “AI for Good”, emphasising that while different technological pathways should be allowed to develop and compete fairly, the fundamental principles guiding AI governance must be established from the outset. He proposed that the Asia-Pacific region take the lead in embracing AI for Good, build on APEC’s longstanding tradition of cooperation, and promote inclusive governance, shared benefits and mutual learning among civilisations. Countries at different stages of development should all have opportunities to participate in AI governance and benefit from technological progress.
Above all, Cui stressed that no amount of computing power, however powerful, can replace the human conscience. AI should help humanity, not replace it.
Below is the full transcript of Ambassador Cui’s keynote speech and conversation with Professor Li Cheng of Hong Kong University.
I am delighted to participate in this roundtable discussion. I would like to thank the Shenzhen Hetao Institute and the Centre on Contemporary China and the World at the University of Hong Kong for their kind invitation, which gives me the opportunity to learn from and exchange views with distinguished leaders and experts from academia and business.
Shenzhen has been at the forefront of China’s reform and opening-up. It has long been renowned for its pioneering spirit, its courage to break new ground, and its commitment to innovation. In just ten days, the 33rd APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting will be held in Shenzhen. Discussing a cutting-edge topic such as artificial intelligence governance in this city, at this particular moment, gives this roundtable discussion extraordinary significance.
In today’s world, when we talk about the relationship between scientific and technological development and the future of humanity, artificial intelligence is perhaps the most widely discussed issue. It has inspired great hopes while also raising many questions. It has opened up unprecedented possibilities while creating unprecedented uncertainties. One might say that artificial intelligence has opened up a whole new world for humanity, yet we are still searching for a reliable compass to navigate it. Humanity is facing a game-changing turning point.
In July this year, the 2026 World Artificial Intelligence Conference and High-Level Meeting on Global AI Governance was held in Shanghai. At the opening ceremony, a Chinese national leader delivered a keynote address entitled “Working Together to Build a Fair and Equitable Global AI Governance System.” He summed up the defining questions of our time that humanity must confront: “When machines begin to think, how should humanity coexist with them? When algorithms participate in decision-making, how can safety be ensured? When technology challenges ethics, how can governance keep pace? When divides continue to widen, how can the benefits of AI be shared by all?” He pointed out that “these questions require the international community to reflect deeply and work together to find answers.”
In his address, the Chinese leader put forward China’s answer: “All countries should uphold a people-centred approach and the principle of developing AI for good, make artificial intelligence an important driving force for common prosperity and shared security, and work together to build a fair and equitable global AI governance system.”
The question of guiding principles that he raised goes to the very heart of AI governance. From a technological perspective, the artificial intelligence we know today may well be only the opening act of a much larger drama. This drama has no predetermined script. The future may bring many more exciting breakthroughs, but inevitably also more unexpected developments. It is far too early to draw definitive conclusions about the different technological pathways for AI development. We should allow them to demonstrate their respective strengths and compete on a level playing field. Perhaps, in time, different paths will ultimately converge. When it comes to the guiding principles of AI development and governance, however, we must establish clarity and build consensus from the very beginning, and remain committed to those principles throughout. Will AI be used for good or for harm? Will it serve a better future shared by all humanity, or the narrow interests of a privileged few? Different principles determine different directions and objectives, lead to different paths, and ultimately produce different outcomes. This choice concerns the future and destiny of human civilisation. We cannot afford ambiguity, nor can we evade the question.
President Xi Jinping’s vision of a people-centred approach and AI for good reflects the fundamental requirements of human civilisation’s development and is consistent with the objective laws of technological progress. It can be said to point to the right path for AI development and governance.
Throughout human history, we have experienced more than one technological revolution and wave of industrial upgrading. These developments have dramatically increased productivity, while also bringing profound disruption to economies, societies, cultures, and systems of governance. Yet humanity has never abandoned its pursuit of a better life, fairness and justice, and the advancement of civilisation. As a result, human society has, on the whole, continued to move forward. The impact of AI, and the difficulty of governing it, may exceed anything we have experienced before. Meeting these challenges will require wisdom and effort on an unprecedented scale. I believe that, as long as we uphold a people-centred approach and the principle of AI for good, consistently place the people at the centre of our efforts, make their aspirations for a better life our objective, and take responsibility for building a better shared future for humanity, we will be able to work together to seize the opportunities of AI, address its challenges, promote its beneficial applications, and improve its governance, so that artificial intelligence can contribute to even greater and better progress in human civilisation.
Ancient Chinese sages described the process through which people understand and transform the world in the following terms: “Investigating things to acquire knowledge, making one’s intentions sincere and one’s mind upright, cultivating oneself, bringing order to the family, governing the country, and bringing peace to the world.” As we seek to understand artificial intelligence through the investigation of things and the acquisition of knowledge, we must attach great importance to sincerity of purpose and integrity of mind, and establish the right guiding principles. Only on this basis can we grasp the underlying laws, achieve meaningful results, contribute to society, and benefit humanity.
Based on these considerations, I would like to offer three suggestions for developing a new paradigm of AI governance in the Asia-Pacific region. I welcome your comments and corrections.
First, establish AI for good as a guiding principle. The region covered by APEC — and whenever I refer to the Asia-Pacific in these remarks, I mean the APEC region — is home to nearly 40% of the world’s population. It accounts for more than 60% of global economic output and almost half of global trade, with internet penetration approaching 90%. Developing and applying AI, and improving its governance, across such a vast region is obviously of vital importance to the region itself, and also carries enormous significance for the world as a whole. If the Asia-Pacific can take the lead in establishing AI for good as a guiding principle, it will benefit billions of people across the region while providing positive guidance for the development and governance of AI worldwide. The significance of such an achievement would be both profound and far-reaching.
Second, build on our strengths in cooperation. Over more than three decades since APEC was established, the region has overcome natural disasters, financial crises, and the shocks of a global pandemic. It has successfully navigated numerous risks and challenges and achieved progress that has attracted worldwide attention. These achievements have been possible because we have consistently advanced regional economic integration in line with broader global trends, expanded shared interests on the basis of mutual respect, built consensus and managed differences through consultation, and upheld open regionalism within a framework of multilateral cooperation. The “APEC Way,” developed over many years, offers successful experience. It is also a unique strength as we look to the future and a valuable resource for building a new paradigm of AI governance in the Asia-Pacific.
Artificial intelligence may present entirely new challenges. But the broader trend of human progress has not been reversed, nor have the shared aspirations of the people of the Asia-Pacific diminished. On the contrary, the need and urgency for stronger cooperation have become even greater. Only by remaining true to our original aspirations can we achieve our goals, and only by upholding sound principles can we pursue meaningful innovation.
Third, promote inclusive development and integration. APEC members are characterised by remarkable diversity. Economically, they differ in size, stage of development, and industrial structure. Technologically, some have long been global leaders, while others are working hard to catch up. In AI specifically, some are at the forefront of global development, while others are only beginning their journeys. AI development and application in the Asia-Pacific should benefit all members, promote common progress, and enable shared prosperity. AI governance should respond to the concerns and needs of all members, encourage broad participation, and promote collective governance.
APEC members also possess extraordinary cultural diversity. Eastern and Western civilisations meet here. Mayan and Melanesian cultures also come together in this region. The achievements of different civilisations are all products of human wisdom and constitute the deepest foundations upon which we can develop artificial intelligence. The common values of humanity, emerging from the convergence of different civilisations, should provide the fundamental guidance for governing AI and shaping the values embedded in AI systems. If AI technology empowers our economies and scientific capabilities, then the finest achievements of human civilisation should also enrich AI with wisdom. The key is to preserve and make full use of the diversity of world civilisations and the distinctive cultures of individual countries, embracing inclusiveness, integration, and mutual learning. The Asia-Pacific arguably has both the greatest need and some of the most favourable conditions to pursue this approach.
Chairman Mao Zedong once said, “The history of humanity is a history of continuous development from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom.” He also said, “Humanity must constantly sum up experience, make discoveries, invent, create, and advance. Arguments for stagnation, pessimism, inaction, and arrogance or complacency are all wrong.”
Today, humanity has invented artificial intelligence. It is profoundly transforming our societies, our lives, and even the ways in which we understand the world. But the course of human progress will not come to a halt. Humanity will continue to make discoveries, invent, create, and advance — perhaps at an even faster pace and with even greater achievements. Artificial intelligence can help us. It should not, and cannot, replace us. No amount of computing power, however immense, can substitute for the human conscience. Human well-being is something we must strive to secure ourselves. The vision of building a community with a shared future for humanity can only be realised through the collective efforts of all humankind. I hope the Asia-Pacific region will set an example in this endeavour, and I very much look forward to the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in ten days providing new strategic direction.
Transcript of the Dialogue (Edited for Length):
Cui Tiankai: Constructive strategic stability means cooperation as the main priority, competition within reasonable bounds, differences kept under control, and peace as an achievable prospect. As long as both sides embrace this approach, AI is a very promising area for cooperation. President Xi also said in his remarks that China and the United States have both the capability and the responsibility to cooperate in this area, to govern AI effectively, and to ensure that artificial intelligence remains under human control and serves the well-being of the people. If both sides have the willingness, this can certainly become an area of cooperation.
Cheng Li: This reflects a change in the balance of power and China’s growing strength. The United States held its midterm elections just a few days ago. The results surprised many people, and one could say that Trump suffered a major defeat. We know that Trump has taken a relatively hands-off approach to artificial intelligence, but there are strong forces within the United States opposed to AI. From my perspective, although J.D. Vance has argued that the war between the United States and Iran was the main reason for the electoral defeat, I personally believe that at least half, perhaps more, of the reaction was driven by concerns about artificial intelligence, income inequality, corruption, and other factors. Following the midterm elections, I think we may see even greater divisions. The 2028 presidential election is approaching quickly. The differences between the two parties over AI policy may widen, and divisions could even emerge within the Republican Party itself. Against this background, how would you assess the impact that artificial intelligence is having on American politics?
Cui Tiankai: Professor Li, you know far more about the United States than I do, so I would not presume to lecture you on the subject. Besides, we are here today to discuss AI governance, not American domestic politics. I really do not have much to add about internal developments in the United States. My hope is simply that, whatever happens domestically in America, it will not have a negative impact on China-US relations or on the cooperation that is possible, and indeed necessary, between our two countries. Whatever problems the United States may be facing, they have nothing to do with China. They were not caused by China. China’s development has never been aimed at replacing or challenging the United States. Never. Of course, I also hope the United States can resolve its own problems, and that its future development will not come at the expense of China’s interests.
Cheng Li: That is very well put. For quite some time, Americans have watched China’s middle class expand while their own has contracted. Some people used to blame China, claiming that Chinese people had taken American jobs. Now it is becoming clearer that the contraction of the American middle class has been driven by widening inequality within the United States itself. But the focus of attention may be shifting. In fact, American perceptions of China’s AI development have undergone a process of change. At one point, the United States believed that China was a generation behind. Today, we can see that the gap is narrowing. As that perception shifts from a generational gap to seeing China as a peer competitor, or even to a sense of fear, could this accelerate American efforts to suppress China’s technological development? I recall a famous remark attributed to Churchill: America can be counted on to do the right thing, but only after it has exhausted all the alternatives. How do you see the challenges facing China’s AI and technological development over the next few years? This is a question of great concern to many companies. Looking ahead, might Trump’s influence be constrained following the midterm elections? Of course, we do not interfere in American politics. That is America’s own business. But developments there affect other countries, particularly China, which has become a major player in artificial intelligence. How should China respond?
Cui Tiankai: Chinese people eat with chopsticks, while Americans eat with knives and forks. So how could China possibly be taking food off America’s plate? China’s development has made the global economic pie bigger, and Americans, with their very effective knives and forks, have promptly cut themselves the biggest slice. Today, every country wants to develop better and faster. That is perfectly normal. We hope all countries can achieve successful development. Naturally, there will be some competition along the way. But we have always emphasised two principles: cooperation benefits both sides, while confrontation harms both. That is a fact, and it is also a lesson we have learned from experience. Why should artificial intelligence not be an area where cooperation takes precedence? As I said earlier, competition can be kept within reasonable bounds. It does not have to be a zero-sum game. And think about it: artificial intelligence, as its very name suggests, is a field of advanced intelligence. In such a sophisticated, cutting-edge field, isn’t it absurd to approach matters with the rather foolish attitudes of fear, confrontation, and suspicion? It is not only ridiculous. It is tragic.
Cheng Li: Very well said, Ambassador Cui. You and I went to study in the United States at roughly the same time, in the 1980s. You have often reminded people in China that the America of today is not the same America as it was forty years ago, thirty years ago, twenty years ago, ten years ago, or even five years ago. How has such a remarkable country reached its present situation? I have never doubted that America is a great country and that the American people are a great people. Yet we now see so many problems: corruption, income inequality, anti-immigration sentiment, culture wars, and so on. What has caused all this? What are the deeper structural reasons? Can the United States find a way out of this predicament? I have recently been speaking with American friends, particularly Democrats, who are very excited. They believe the election results show that American democracy has returned. But I do not share that feeling. I think this is a long process, and the country is going through an extremely painful period. So I would like to ask: why has America reached this point? How long might it take to emerge from these difficulties? And because America’s problems inevitably affect other countries, how should we understand the United States today?
Cui Tiankai: You are actually better placed than I am to answer that question. You mentioned Dr Kissinger earlier. I have enormous respect for him. During my time working in the United States, he gave me a great deal of guidance and assistance. I remember that in the summer of 2021, shortly before I left my post and returned to China, I made a special visit to his home in Connecticut. I said to him, “Doctor, I have been here for eight years, and the America I see today seems like a different country from the one I encountered when I first arrived.” He agreed with my observation. Of course, explaining what has caused these changes is an enormous and complicated question, perhaps beyond my ability to answer. But I do think we need to observe these developments carefully.
Your question is exactly right. We need to look at the deeper structural factors. We need to examine changes in America’s economy, politics, society, culture, and even demographics. We also need to consider whether certain contradictions have accumulated over a long period, and whether problems within America’s governance system and governing capacity have built up to the point where they are now erupting together. So we must not attribute everything happening in America to any single individual. We should not imagine that replacing one person in a couple of years will somehow bring back the America of the past. America cannot return to the past. Everything must move forward. Perhaps the United States has reached a historical turning point. It will have to confront these accumulated problems and resolve these contradictions before it can move forward more successfully. Of course, we hope it succeeds. But that will depend primarily on the United States itself. The choice belongs to the American people. President Xi has said, both in Washington and Beijing, that the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the goal of making America great again can proceed in parallel, reinforce each other, and benefit humanity. That is certainly what we hope to see. For our part, the most important thing is to do our own work well. There is an ancient Chinese saying: “Those who know themselves are wise; those who overcome themselves are strong.” This applies to countries just as much as to individuals. The most important thing is the ability to transcend one’s own limitations. I hope the United States can demonstrate that spirit.
Cheng Li: In your earlier remarks, you made three recommendations concerning the Asia-Pacific region and expressed the hope that the region could play a leading role. What guidance would you offer us, particularly the younger generation?
Cui Tiankai: When we were in secondary school, it was during the Cultural Revolution, and we were sent down to the countryside. So we did not have much opportunity to study classical Chinese poetry. But we read a great deal of Chairman Mao’s poetry, and I can still recite much of it today. Let me borrow two lines from his poems to answer your question. The first comes from a poem he wrote when he was just over thirty, standing by the Xiang River: “Who will determine the fate of this vast land?” Isn’t the world still asking the same question today? Where is the world heading? What does the future hold? The second comes from a poem he wrote toward the end of the Long March, whose victory marks its 90th anniversary this year: “For truly great figures, look to the present age.”
Cui Tiankai: We have actually been raising these issues with the Americans all along. The United States has placed so many obstacles in the way of people-to-people exchanges and educational and scientific cooperation. These include refusing visas, and even cases where people have obtained visas but are turned back at the airport, deported, or detained in small rooms for extended periods without any reasonable justification. We hope these practices will change.
I think it is perfectly normal for people to want to go to the United States to study, work for a period, or simply visit, whether for their professional development or research. Of course, our own institutions and opportunities are also improving, and in the future I am sure more foreign students will want to come to China. That, too, is perfectly normal. President Xi once described to the Americans a situation in which “you are part of us, and we are part of you.” I think that is a much healthier state of affairs, and I hope we can gradually move in that direction.
Cui Tiankai: Why do we insist that artificial intelligence should be developed for good? Because I believe, or at least hope, that countries around the world will make the right choice and ensure that this new technology genuinely benefits people. China and the United States used to have extensive exchanges in science and technology. There were even formal agreements on scientific and technological cooperation. But now such exchanges have become much more difficult. Objectively speaking, the obstacles are on the American side. The United States has erected numerous barriers and treats almost everything as a matter of so-called national security.
Of course, every country has legitimate and reasonable national security concerns. The United States has them, China has them, and other countries have them too. But we must define accurately what genuinely constitutes national security. If everything is thrown into the national security basket, then where does genuine national security fit? Broadening the concept of national security without limits, and weaponising and politicising scientific, technological, cultural, and educational exchanges, actually undermines genuine national security interests. I hope the American side will come to recognise this. I hope dialogue can lead to some concrete results in cooperation. Even if we can only take small steps forward, that is worthwhile, as long as we are moving in the right direction.